Cambreleng v. Purton

New York Supreme Court

Cambreleng v. Purton

16 N.Y.S. 49, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 771, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 299

DecidedOctober 16, 1891

StatusPublished

This text of 16 N.Y.S. 49 (Cambreleng v. Purton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cambreleng v. Purton, 16 N.Y.S. 49, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 771, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 299 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This undertaking was not given upon an injunction, and no stipulation was contained in it for a reference to ascertain the extent of the liability of the sureties. The special term was accordingly right in holding that it had no power to order such reference, but that the remedy was by an action on the undertaking. The order for that reason should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

This undertaking was not given upon an injunction, and no stipulation was contained in it for a reference to ascertain the extent of the liability of the sureties. The special term was accordingly right in holding that it had no power to order such reference, but that the remedy was by an action on the undertaking. The order for that reason should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 N.Y.S. 49, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 771, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cambreleng-v-purton-nysupct-1891.